Sunday, January 02, 2011

Census 2011: The ‘Mind Your Own’ Campaign

There really is only one answer to the Census 2011 religion question:

“ Mind your own *%$#@!! business ”

The incursions of the state into our private affairs are becoming a cause of considerable concern. A person’s religious beliefs are his or her personal domain. While the Census 2011 religion question remains optional, it is not likely to do so: the more the state gets to know, the more it appears to assume a divine right to know.

Today's invasion of privacy will be tomorrow's loss of liberty.

And so the ‘Mind Your Own’ campaign is hereby officially launched today upon His Grace’s blog.

There is even a Facebook Groupdedicated to the cause (please join and 'like'!).

When the state decided in 2001 to begin prying into the religious affiliations of Her Majesty’s subjects, eyebrows were raised, questions asked, conspiracies spread and bloggers did what bloggers do.

But the people heard the cry of Minch Yoda.

For the Jedi to achieve what they did was really quite remarkable: to inspire the official registration of a greater number of adherents than those who expressed affiliation to or identification with either Judaism or Sikhism was laudable.

And so it was established, if a little yodically, that the Jedi population of the United Kingdom numbers 390,127.

But this campaign was a typically benign and uniquely British response to the sort of skirmish by the state which in France would bring the protesting hordes onto the streets baying for blood.

The Jedi campaign was glorious repartee.

But it wasn’t revolution.

It didn’t effect change.

And so the state has come back this year with even more probing ‘religion’ questions.

According to Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, 'everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion'. It may be further observed:

1. Article 9 includes the freedom of belief and the freedom to manifest belief2. A belief does not have to be a religious conviction3. A belief can be an absence of belief4. A belief (i) must not be trivial (ii) must be consistent with basic standards of human dignity or integrity and (iii) must be coherent, in the sense of being intelligible and capable of being understood5. It is hard to predict whether an act is a manifestation of belief or not6. A religious obligation is likely to be a manifestation of belief7. A religious motivation is not likely to be a manifestation of belief8. An interference with an Article 9 right can be justified

But who determines religious triviliality? Who judges a religion's coherence and intelligibility? Why is the belief in a carpenter who gets resurrected from the dead not absurd?

What is coherent about human infallibility or intelligible about angels dictating books to illiterate warlords? What is capable of being understood about a man with an elephant's head, or a book which is revered as a living guru?

Is there any inconsistency between human dignity, Yoda and the Force?

His Grace is fed up to the back teeth of the database state; of having to classify himself as ‘married/civil partnership’ or designate himself as an ‘EU citizen’ instead of British. And forms which enquire into ethnicity, disability and sexuality, all in the interests of ‘diversity’, are becoming increasingly ubiquitous. Data gathering has evolved into a beast of omniscience. It has developed a plethora of permutations in labyrinthine layers of infinitely nuanced complexity.

And the state has not proved sufficiently competent to safeguard that information.

Categorising religious adherence is simply a step too far: one’s religious beliefs are no business of the state.

Not least because HM Government have never defined ‘religion’.

And the British Humanist Association have got this completely wrong: by attempting to elicit more accurate data (a laudable and honest pursuit), they risk perpetuating the inaccuracy for a further decade.

Ticking a box does not make you a Christian.

But neither does going to church every Sunday.

The ‘cultural’ affiliation – ‘believing without belonging’ – remains strong in the UK: it is not the same as ‘No Religion’.

Of course, one should not confuse ethnicity with religion, or culture with creed.

But it is straightforward to tick ‘male’ or ‘female’, for these are clearly defined. You can fill in ‘age’, ‘geographical location’ and count the number of bedrooms in your house. These are facts.

But ‘religion’?

How can the state presume to make windows into men’s souls?

They helpfully list a few Christian denominations to guide us.

But what of the Jehovah’s Witnesses? Christadelphians? Unitarians? Mormons?

Does one need to be Trinitarian to be a Christian?

Does one need to believe in the perfect revelation and final prophethood of Mohammed to be a Muslim?

And what about the Buddhists?

Why is that a relgion and not a philosophy of life?

Can one hold two faiths simultaneously? May one be both Buddhist and Shinto?

Perhaps this is a blessing, for expletives and expressions of frustration only demean the integrity of the campaign.

Remember, today's invasion of privacy will be tomorrow's loss of liberty.

The National Census is NOT being abolished: merely the inefficient 10-yearly form which is out of date within a year. Government data gathering in the future will be electronic and more frequent. Unless a stand is taken now, this question (and others yet to be conceived) will become mandatory.

Our freedoms of conscience, religion and association are too precious to entrust to a government database.

Just read your article and mentioned its subject matter to my son, we had a chuckle over the 'Jedi religion' and the idea of a 'mind your own business' religion as well.

My sons response to this infringement on privacy is typical of his (Jedi) generation and rather good.

Why let this census allow Islam become the dominant religion in this country? Why not everyone say C of E then the politicians will have to acknowledge it as the dominant religion? Good point

He also said he couldn't imagine the Catholic faith playing second fiddle to Islam and referred to the expression 'my enemy's enemy is my friend', so why not just say Catholicism and stuff the politicians and Islam in one swoop?

Sometimes I find conversations with the younger generations very insightful.

I can see where this is leading, And if it is in the direction I believe it is going it is quite sinister.In the days of the Roman Empire when John wrote The Revelation different religions were tolerated as long as they were registered (as religio Licita).These legal religions (approved by Caesar)placed their'gods' in the Pantheon in Rome.Caesar was known as Pontiflex Maximus a title which was passed to the Popes.Pontiflex Maximus , defender of Bridges or on a different level a bridge between this World and the next.There is more than a passing similarity between the Roman System and the way things are going in the E U which seems to accept all religions except Biblical Christianity.Perhaps the wheel has turned full circle?.How long before Biblical Christianity becomes outlawed?

What, then, is this 'plain meaning' of 'trivial', which even you qualify with 'fairly'?

Mrs OldMaid,

Because any census which records Islam as the dominant religion in the UK would obviously be discredited from the outset. This is not about religious supremacy; it is about privacy. Religious adherence is no business of the state.

I agree religion is no business of the State, but unfortuately evidence suggests that politicos are very much swayed by Islamic demands.

Do you really suppose the likes of the MCB wouldn't milk their 'majority' for all it was worth and our hand-wringing politicos wouldn't pretend they wouldn't give more of our taxes via some obscure named quango?

But who determines religious triviliality? Who judges a religion's coherence and intelligibility?

Perhaps they should add believers in Modern Quantum Physics to the list?

For if they did, I am sure many if not a majority would put their cross in that box, simply out of faith in modern science, without knowing more then the tiniest amount about the subject.

Especially of course, self-proclaimed atheists, like for example Richard Dawkins.

Which is rather strange if not at all surprising, for modern science has opened up the very real possibility that not only is the existence of a divine creator evidently possible, it is at least as likely as not.

As I have said before, religion is science, and science is religion. It always has been, and always will be.

Religious faith is simply a device where by science is more easily explained, for the benefit of the establishment, or the people at the very top of society,(the priest-hoods ) doing the explaining.

Quantum Physics dictates that matter changes form and function subject to the observation of the individual and well as collective human consciousness. Which I am sure you will agree throws up an almost infinite amount of possibilities.

Which is why I do not in any way understand people like your 'friend' Richard Dawkins who is either dishonestly claiming to be a scientist, or is dishonestly claiming to be an atheist.

It is possible that Dawkins is simply just a very stupid person, more likely simply self-delusional.

For he above many others should surely know that all science has ever achieved since the dawn of human civilization is to create far more questions that it could ever have given any answers to.

It is a truism, that the more we know, the more ignorant we become.

The truth has always being staring us in the face. As all TRUE Christians have always known, LOVE is the very essence of TRUTH, and therefore the only thing that can set you free.

If the belief happens to be a political ideology tarted up as a religion, if the goal of the ideology is the overthrow of the state, and if the ideology has proved itself over centuries to be retrograde and malign (to the extent that it authorizes murder to propagate itself), is it not then in the state’s, and the people’s, interest to track the growth of that ‘religion’, the better to defend against it?

I would hope that people of all religious persuasions would follow suit and enter the tick against 'other' - this is a matter of principle which applies to all, regardless of creed (or lack thereof).A fitting entry in the 'Details' box could for the sake of brevity be 'Not Your Concern.' I'll go with that.

"The president says: Do not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ crucified.

All:Fight valiantly as a disciple of Christ against sin, the world and the devil, and remain faithful to Christ to the end of your life."

Many regard the census itself an intrusion; so what? How is policy to be determined without facts? For example from The telegraph 28 Dec: "The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life estimates that there are 2,869,000 Muslims in Britain, an increase of 74 per cent on its previous figure of 1,647,000, which was based on the 2001 census."What are the implications for education when they insist on a religious education in predominantly Muslim areas?

Christains need to declare themselves and assert their faith at every opportunity. Others do!

On a different point raised, to tick 'Other' would be giving false information if that didn't strictly apply.

I agree with AncientBriton. If Christians - even those only 'culturally Christian' - do not declare themselves, the Government will believe we are a purely secular society (except for muslims), and act accordingly.

Why is the belief in a carpenter who gets resurrected from the dead not absurd?

Clearly it is!

Remember, today's invasion of privacy will be tomorrow's loss of liberty.

The census is an inefficient means of collecting information as it very soon becomes out of date and so many real-time alternatives are available. But the important question is why so many fear information about themselves being available. It makes strange bedfellows of Cranmer, Liberty and the human rights lobby.

Loss of privacy doesn’t equate to loss of liberty. Those motivated to conceal invariably have something to hide. If virtually everything is known about everybody the power of information becomes diminished.

We are slowly but inexorably moving towards an open society where boundaries are crumbling and information is freely exchanged. Just like the open source software movement collaboration will replace competition. Both the capitalist and socialist paradigms are outmoded, although what will supersede them is not yet clear.

Eventually belief in religion too will fade and you won’t need a census to tell you that it has happened, the empty churches will be evidence enough. Openness allows for the transfer of ideas and that enhances liberty rather than threatens it, so bring it on I say.

As part of the "No Religion" Census Campaign, I have no problem in declaring my lack of religious belief. Religious faith, absence of it, and free expression, are all personal choices as individual rights.

"Religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of life and the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a supernatural agency, or human beings’ relation to that which they regard as holy, sacred, spiritual, or divine."WIKIPEDIA

Seems a reasonable definition to me.

So should we be asking questions of those subscribing to Dawkins theories?Should we ask questions of those atheist'scientist'?Of those subscribing to 'free market' capitalism?Of 'socialists' and 'markists'?

All 'religions according to the above definition.

Maybe you have a point afterall!

Still, I want to state my belief system.

Does 'religion' have any'business' with the 'state'? Is there any purpose to life?Are the 'Two Swords' irreconcilably distinct? with What understandings of man and his place in this unfathomable universe 'should' we base our state on - if any?

Interesting that so many people who have "liked" the Facebook campaign page seem to already be voluntarily sharing their religious affiliations with the world via their public profiles. Or am I missing the point?

In the last census, in the section where one had to explain the principle duties of one's job, I wrote "killing civil service vermin". That was the longest explanation I could fit in the allowed space; the absence of any adverse comment suggests that not very much notice is taken of census data.

"Our freedoms of conscience, religion and association are too precious to entrust to a government database."

But presumably (in the cases to which I was alluding above) not too precious to be voluntarily handed over to an American corporate for the purposes of cultural stereotyping and targeted advertisement?

Chancellor More,From a Catholic perspective,Jesus is God.Mary is Jesus’ mother.Therefore, Mary is the mother of God. ...... Jesus pre existed Mary!In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. (John 1:1-4,14)

Mary was the Mother of of Jesus`s humanity,of the man Jesus. (Jesus was totally God and totally man)That is why we never read in the Christian Bible of Mary being the Mother of God.

Might seem a small point to some but small changes to Scripture can lead to massive changes in theology!.

For Mary to be Mother of God Mary would have to have pre-existed God which is surely stretching the imagination a trifle too far.Mary mother of Jesus is surely the correct term.

"Loss of privacy doesn’t equate to loss of liberty. Those motivated to conceal invariably have something to hide. If virtually everything is known about everybody the power of information becomes diminished."

It's called targeting.

In the old days this was the basis for sales and marketing. Today it is being used for social engineering and propaganda purposes.

Your Grace.The chances are that all of your communicants are already earmarked by Eurostassi internet spys, who know more about our stated beliefs from our submissions to your blog than the laughable Census could ever hope to establish from our answers in a thousand years.It's getting more like The Matrix daily. Perhaps we should perpetuate the joke by claiming to be named Neo & writing 'Truth' in the religion box, after all to every man, what he/she believes in represents the truth as they understand it.Totally agree with you that State interference is going over the top.

Shame on you. You deny theological insight and you deny church Tradition.

The Son of God as part of the Trinity pre-exists and exists outside time. Jesus of Nazereth was God made man. Mary gave birth to Jesus, God made man.

The hypostatic union is a theological term used with reference to the Incarnation to express the revealed truth that in Christ one person subsists in two natures, the Divine and the human.

The understanding was brought about gradually, and was definitively established by the Council of Chalcedon (451), which declared that in Christ the two natures, each retaining its own properties, are united in one subsistence and one person.

The Blessed Virgin Mary is the mother of Jesus Christ, the mother of God.

St. Matthew (1:25) testifies that Mary "brought forth her first-born son" and that He was called Jesus. According to St. John (1:15) Jesus is the Word made flesh, the Word Who assumed human nature in the womb of Mary. As Mary was truly the mother of Jesus, and as Jesus was truly God from the first moment of His conception, Mary is truly the mother of God.

Scripture and tradition agree in ascribing to Mary the greatest personal sanctity.

She is conceived without the stain of original sin; she shows the greatest humility and patience in her daily life (Luke 1:38, 48); she exhibits an heroic patience under the most trying circumstances (Luke 2:7, 35, 48; John 19:25-27).

When there is question of sin, Mary must always be excepted. Mary's complete exemption from actual sin is by a special privilege of God. The church believes Mary was impeccable, not by the essential perfection of her nature, but by a special Divine privilege.

The doctrine of Mary's spiritual motherhood of men is contained in the fact that she is the antitype of Eve: Eve is our natural mother because she is the origin of our natural life; so Mary is our spiritual mother because she is the origin of our spiritual life.

Again, Mary's spiritual motherhood rests on the fact that Christ is our brother, being "the firstborn among many brethren" (Romans 8:29). She became our mother at the moment she consented to the Incarnation of the Word, the Head of the mystical body whose members we are; and she sealed her motherhood by consenting to the bloody sacrifice on the cross which is the source of our supernatural life. Mary and the holy women (Matthew 17:56; Mark 15:40; Luke 23:49; John 19:25) assisted at the death of Jesus on the cross; she probably remained during the taking down of His sacred body and during His funeral.

In the Apocalypse (12:1-16) occurs a passage singularly applicable to Our Blessed Mother:

"And a great sign appeared in heaven: A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; and being with child, she cried travailing in birth, and was in pain to be delivered. And there was seen another sign in heaven: and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads, and ten horns, and on his heads seven diadems; and his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven; and cast them to the earth; and the dragon stood before the woman who was ready to be delivered; that when she should be delivered, he might devour her son. And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod; and her son was taken up to God, and to his throne. And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she had a place prepared by God, that there they should feed her a thousand two hundred sixty days."

Chancellor More.Whilst I am very happy to observe your obvious state of spiritual & sublime bliss. Although I must confess that personally I cannot or will not accept the position that you attribute to the Virgin Mary. I cannot see how your posting has relevance to Dr Cranmers current posting about the coming Census.

For pitys sake please refrain from igniting a mischevious debate that will produce more heat than illumination.

Humanists are a joke and merely a front organisation for the gay lobby - Porteous-Wood is simply the other half of Terry Sanderson the gay sex author.

As for the Census, that is totally absurd. There was no need to ask about religion until the Marxists became the ruling elite and it is simply an attempt to fine how many Muslims the country has imported.

At least we don't yet have to travel to the town of our birth "to be counted" as with Joseph and Mary; the exodus from our towns and cities back to Pakistan and North Africa would leave many towns devoid of life

Your Grace, am I right in thinking that refusing to answer the census leads to a fine or imprisonment?

Chancellor More, theological insight and church tradition never saved anybody. Only accepting Christ's redemptive work on the cross can do that. The virgin Mary is not and never has been a co-redemptrix, despite what Mel Gibson would have us believe.

No he was not, he is the son of God, as in a far less direct manner we all are. Or distant relatives of Gods fallen angles anyway. It just happens to say so in the book of Genesis, and quite clearly so.

Matthew 1verse 20

Joseph thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is the Holy Ghost.

Holy Ghost may sound rather god like, but it does not actually sound like GOD. Ghost is used as one might describe semen or genetic encoding such as DNA.

Jesus may have been a god, but by my calculations he could not possibly be GOD the creator and divine architect of The Universe.

You can't really be in two places, doing two completely different things, at the exact same time, which must have logically been done at a completely different time. This not even two thousand years ago.

Matthew Chapter 1 verse 48

Be ye therefore perfect, even as your father which is in heaven is perfect.

Jesus seems to be implying that our father is also God the Grand architect of the Universe, does he not?

The problem with some people, not mentioning any names, of a certain very established religion, which will for my own protection also remain unnamed, is that they don't seem to read their own bibles very well, and when they do they seem to get the wrong end of the stick, so to speak.

You see we can all play the quoting game, and there is plenty more where that came from, to say the least, as I am sure you know.

You see, the problem a certain very established religion has with the Bible is that we all can now have one, and read it using our own language.

Which is tricky, especially for said very well established religion. It is not difficult to understand why this certain very well established religion was so keen to stop us getting a copy, or heaven forfend, gain one in English, or even worse for them, an education with which to help us read it with.

I hope you can also see that the Bible does not require someone to tell us what it is supposed to mean, because we are all mainly capable of coming to our own conclusions, rightly or wrongly.

For surely knowledge is only as good as the mind that first sort it, was then allowed, or fortunate enough to find it, then finally understood it as best as they are personally capable.

Otherwise certain highly enlightening bits of information can very easily become just a potentially dangerous form of propaganda, especially if it is only exclusively held by people that cannot be trusted with it.

For example, a very well established religion, prince or ruler, of any particular place, nation, city state, or culture.

Being new to the 'blog' I appreciate your genuine and honest counsell on these matters.

The propostion to avoid declaring one's faith to the state is one I cannot accept and thought it opportune to reference the celebration of the wonderful physical manifestation of our salvation and Our Blessed Mary's role in this.

I can assure you my intention is not to mischieve make. There is such venom here towards the Universal and Apostolic Church I feel duty bound to counter the calumnies and simplified caracatures of Roman Catholic teaching presented.

On reflection, I will not engage in contentious discussion. I will also show more reserve in future contributions. It is unbecoming and unproductive.

Who cares what the guys at the top know ... I dunno what to tell 'em anyway ... what difference will it make ...

Chill people ... I'm a seeker ... I know God exists ... I dunno how or where to find him ... you guys worry me about Jesus ... how can this be cool ... the little I know about him ... what he said and did ... I like ... this is a song I sing when I'm down ...

omniscience is of course possible according to modern science, however in this particular case I find same unlikely as well a pointless diversion for the essential truth of the matter.

How about this bit I have just found, this should turn some heads.

Revelation 17 verse 5

And upon HER forehead was a name written MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

and

Revelation 17 verse 18

And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

Now I don't know about you lot, but it would seem to me that there is only one great city that has ever come close to finding itself reigning over the kings of the earth, and of course still does in many more ways then hardly anyone is fully conscious of, and that would start with an R, end in an E, and have an O and an M some where in between.

I also note that no where in revelation does it actually state that followers of the great mystery schools such as, a certain very well established religion, and of course freemasons were actually materially wrong to any great extent, but simply something that should be very much avoided, to say the very least.

The plot thickens, now it becomes even clearer why certain people did not wish the profane to read any kind of bible, especially that bit of it.

Anon (1:07),the real tragedy is people being mislead by false doctrines.It is blasphemy to make up traditions which oppose the word of God.

Do I make people my enemies by telling them the truth......apparently so!I would rather tell you the truth and have you my enemy than lie to you and have you my friend!I don`t hate any person ,but what I hate are religious systems that deceive and lead people astray and I will continue to oppose them!

I dont think I like the database state much either. Perhaps the databse state and dumbing down are relational , perhaps even necesesary ! so that we are all the same to be erm compatable in all aspects .

As your grace found out , try removing your facebook profile .

However dont get into too much of upset , this topic is simmering away , although I have to admitt it seemed to take some people a very long time to see what it was doing , other than allowing the easy printing of post labels.

Mr.Eman @ 01:45I feel no constraint in posting a translation of Salve Regina:Hail, holy Queen, Mother of Mercy,our life, our sweetness and our hope.To thee do we cry, poor banished children of Eve;to thee do we send up our sighs,mourning and weeping in this valley of tears.Turn then, most gracious advocate,thine eyes of mercy toward us;and after this our exile,show unto us the blessed fruit of thy womb, Jesus.O clement, O loving, O sweet Virgin Mary.V. Pray for us O holy Mother of God,R. that we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.To all true protestants this has to be blasphemy. It assumes the co-redemptrix status of an historical figure who is dead and in the grave. In no way do I question the sincerity of your convictions but they can not be reconciled with Scriptural teaching.

I personally find it quite interesting to see the results, and find out just how many people profess to believe in God, etc.

But as you rightly point out, all we can find out is how many people choose to label themselves in a certain way. A person who goes to church lots, a person who shouts Bible verses at people and a person who tries simply to live by the ethics of Jesus might all refer to themselves as 'Christian'.

And increasingly I meet/talk to people who believe in God and the spiritual dimension but out of despair or disdain or whatever else choose not to subscribe to any organised religion.

I'm personally not made irate by the issue but I do see it as problematic and can appreciate why someone as thoughtful and intelligent as His Grace would be incensed by it.

We must agree to disagree both in your interpretation of this wonderful prayer (as ascribing a co-redemtrix role to Mary), and also in your diminuation of her position.

There is ample scriptural support for Catholic teaching - if scripture is not understood exclusively at one level.

So much in scripture can be read at so many levels. One has to decide whether to trust your ownunderstanding or listen to both the Holy Spirit and to those commissioned by Christ to teach and expound His message.

Interesting post, Your Grace. Thank you for the links, which I'm using.

On the last Census, being almost as disgusted as I am now, I wrote quite a lot to the general effect of MYOB - mandatory responses notwithstanding.

Another opportunity for improved performance strikes me almost as a Godsend:) Surely it's one of the best chances yet to set the wheels rolling on Lawful Rebellion!

_________________________ Also, Your Grace - Update on the Case of the Disappearing Posts.

I'v tried for several hours place a reasoned and respectably informed response to the 46th post (@ 02/2011, 02:49 pm) on your "2011...constitutional reform" article. My text has been outright rejected a couple of times, and has posted and been removed multiple times. On the last occasion I left the open comment box (and my post, which it had 'accepted') on the computer from 0207-0314 hours.

Once I'd closed and re-opened the box, however my comment had, once more disappeared. [And all this in the presence of 'coincidental' word verifications.]

Some thought went into the final version of my offering (c. 0207 hrs), so if Your Grace should find and consider it worthy, perhaps he will choose to publish it.

Mr. Enman @ 02:45"There is ample scriptural support for Catholic teaching - if scripture is not understood exclusively at one level."

"Do you dismiss completely the great Founding Fathers of our faith?"

Certainly the Church Fathers can not be dismissed. Were not the canonical books certified by them? Was not truth generally upheld and were they not Godly men imbued with the desire to spread God's word? Most surely a great work was undertaken by them and to them much is owed. The problem comes when error is manifest and is then compounded by the substitution of man's reasoning to ammend the clear teaching of scripture.

I am not sure how scripture has different levels of understanding. It stands on its own merits as the inspired word of God. Sola Scriptura.

It appears to me that "ample scriptural support" is sorely lacking for many Catholic doctrines: Original Sin, Immaculate Conception, Petrine Inheritance (addressed in the previous thread. Perhaps you missed it) Purgatory, Mariolatry, Transubstantiation, Sunday Worship and Priestly Celibacy come most immediately to mind.

"If the belief happens to be a political ideology tarted up as a religion, if the goal of the ideology is the overthrow of the state, and if the ideology has proved itself over centuries to be retrograde and malign (to the extent that it authorizes murder to propagate itself), is it not then in the state’s, and the people’s, interest to track the growth of that ‘religion’, the better to defend against it?

Agreed. Maybe there should only one question to get straight to the point, 'are you a Moslem - Yes or No?' Would sure save a lot of bother.

The Word of God is not Jesus the man. I am most sorry if this disappoints anyone. However I do not believe you will be disappointed when the BIG IT actually happens, not if what I have read in Revelation chapter 19 verses 11-16 is anything to go by.

The Word of God arrives on a white horse, according to my book, it does not say anything about Jesus himself actually returning.

To my knowledge Jesus did not himself state that he was God, but was the son of God. Which cannot mean the same thing, however many times a priest may claim that it does.

Sorry but Jesus cannot be Father, son, and holy ghost at the same time, which is most likely just as well. Good trick if you can pull it off, but I refuse to believe that any one could seriously expect even an idiot to believe that Jesus Christ, could ever have been his own father.

However somebody certainly thinks he is.

The Holy trinity is THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH itself, or more accurately The Pope himself. This because the Pope has stated time and time again that he is Christ while the other one is absent.

However if Christ is not with us every single day, then he might as well not be here at all. The Pope claims to have both spiritual and temporal power, as well as being God himself. Not my words his.

He insists on being called The Holy Father, even by kings, queens and presidents. Quite some nerve, don't you think?

The Bible however has much to say about mere mortals who claim to be Christ, or worse God himself, as you will shortly see.

Surely only one Holy Father can exist at any time. So how does the Pope get away with such a serious breach of copyright, some may even call it identity fraud on an extremely grand scale?

An RC priest is told to believe and therefore does believe that he is also Christ, while he is performing Mass. Also a mass cannot even take place without a priest, therefore a Christ being present.

Real Christians do not, and never have had this problem, because Christ is always with us, representative of the established church being present, or not.

YET, the below should seriously worry any member of The RCC still reading, about the future destination of their eternal soul.

Matthew 24 verses 23&24

Then if any man shall say unto you, lo here is Christ, or there; believe it not.For there shall be false Christs, and shall shew great signs and wonders: insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

Please note the word Christs, not Christ. To my knowledge only The RCC makes it absolutely certain that there will not be just two Christs at anyone time, but quite possibly thousands performing mass at the same time around the entire world.

Our wannabe Holy Father seems to be doing a mighty fine job at utterly deceiving many, at least a Billion and counting, by most accounts.

Which is not so surprising you don't become the most powerful figure head in the known cosmos by being in any way second rate at your chosen profession.

Ok so you may be wondering what The Word of God is, if it is not Jesus the man.

I have given this much thought, as I am sure many others have over the last few thousand years.

I believe that my best guesses are as good as anyone else's, so here we go.

The Word of God came down from heaven. Now we all know where the heavens are supposed to be I hope.

Therefore IMO The Word of God is The Heavens. If much of that suddenly falls to Earth, it will make one hell of an impact, riding on a white horse or not. Something that not even the BBC will be able to easily ignore.

However it could be something coming from the heavens that may have a far more subtle but infinitely more wonderful affect on especially the fully conscious beings of this particular material world. An enlightenment that will make all that came before seem tame by comparison.

The Word of God is LOVE, and love is the only truth that can set you free.

What makes it all so intensely interesting, is that there exists a fairly strong possibility that this could very well happen during our own lifetimes.

Therefore if I was a RC, I would try to get my house in order as quickly as possible, you simply can't be too careful when it comes to matters so important as your own eternal soul, or if you prefer, your individual consciousness.

In April 1933, the Hitler regime began a census of all Germans, partly aimed at identifying Jews. The first step was to register data about the citizens of Germany’s largest state, Prussia, which Dehomag was commissioned to undertake.

In 1937, the Nazi regime ordered another nationwide census. This one was decisive for Hitler’s war preparations and “for the Jews it would be the final and decisive identification step”. (p139) In accordance with the Nuremberg race laws, it meant tracing any Jewish ancestry. IBM bought in 70 card sorters, 60 tabulators, 76 multipliers and 90 million punch cards for the 3.5 million Reich Mark contract (worth about $14m today).

In advance of the Nazi annexation of Austria in 1938, IBM’s Viennese subsidiary, under the supervision of Adolf Eichmann, was working to collate comprehensive demographic information about the country on punch cards. This meant the Hitler regime knew exactly where the Austrian Jews were that were to subject to the forced expulsion programme.

When German troops invaded Czechoslovakia on March 15, 1939, IBM was already there and was helping to run strategic operations such as the State Railway, whose system could be easily taken over by the Nazis.

After several postponements, the nation-wide census ordered in 1937 was finally carried out in May 1939. Some 750,000 census-takers were involved, covering all of the Greater Reich’s 22 million households—80 million citizens in Germany, Austria, the Sudentenland, and the Saar.

This was Dehomag’s biggest undertaking. It included a so-called “supplemental card” to record each household’s racial ancestry. This enabled the identification of a total of 330,530 so-called “racial Jews” in the Greater Reich. This was then broken down by gender, and was further divided between “full-Jews” and other shades of Jewish ancestry, with all those recorded in this way also being identified by their address.

This pattern would be repeated over and over again. In virtually every country that the Nazis occupied, an IBM subsidiary—normally already doing business there—would collect national and racial statistical information for the Nazis, which could then be used to identify Jews and other undesirables.

In April 1933, the Hitler regime began a census of all Germans, partly aimed at identifying Jews. The first step was to register data about the citizens of Germany’s largest state, Prussia, which Dehomag was commissioned to undertake.

In 1937, the Nazi regime ordered another nationwide census. This one was decisive for Hitler’s war preparations and “for the Jews it would be the final and decisive identification step”. (p139) In accordance with the Nuremberg race laws, it meant tracing any Jewish ancestry. IBM bought in 70 card sorters, 60 tabulators, 76 multipliers and 90 million punch cards for the 3.5 million Reich Mark contract (worth about $14m today).

In advance of the Nazi annexation of Austria in 1938, IBM’s Viennese subsidiary, under the supervision of Adolf Eichmann, was working to collate comprehensive demographic information about the country on punch cards. This meant the Hitler regime knew exactly where the Austrian Jews were that were to subject to the forced expulsion programme.

When German troops invaded Czechoslovakia on March 15, 1939, IBM was already there and was helping to run strategic operations such as the State Railway, whose system could be easily taken over by the Nazis.

After several postponements, the nation-wide census ordered in 1937 was finally carried out in May 1939. Some 750,000 census-takers were involved, covering all of the Greater Reich’s 22 million households—80 million citizens in Germany, Austria, the Sudentenland, and the Saar.

This was Dehomag’s biggest undertaking. It included a so-called “supplemental card” to record each household’s racial ancestry. This enabled the identification of a total of 330,530 so-called “racial Jews” in the Greater Reich. This was then broken down by gender, and was further divided between “full-Jews” and other shades of Jewish ancestry, with all those recorded in this way also being identified by their address.

This pattern would be repeated over and over again. In virtually every country that the Nazis occupied, an IBM subsidiary—normally already doing business there—would collect national and racial statistical information for the Nazis, which could then be used to identify Jews and other undesirables.

We could simply all put "MYOB", and the computer would probably decide this was a religion like Jedi. Of course it will fool the computer if anyone puts another letter between the "O" and the "B", unless we all agree in advance.

Throughout history Satan's agents have attempted to destroy G-d's chosen people. Hitler was in a direct line of succession to Haman the Syrian. Those of us who see the same sinister hand at work in the construction of the totalitarian system known as the European Union, and have some knowledge of Satan's plans for Jewry as described in the Book of Revelation, would do well to meditate upon the significance of Voyager's onservations.

Srizels ,HalleluYaH is a Pure Hebrew word and yet is pronounced the same in many languages, when properly transliterated. Hallelu-yah means, "praise ye" - "YaH".

YaH is the personal name of the Creator. Although YaH is the basic or short form of the divine name, YaHWeH. The full form of the Heavenly Father's Name is YaHWeH found in the 0.T. of the Bible in its original Hebrew language 6,825+ times according to Strong's word referenced #H3068 & #H3069.

“I am not sure how scripture has different levels of understanding. It stands on its own merits as the inspired word of God. Sola Scriptura.”

Really! I’m sure you do understand! Did the First Testament prefigure the New? How do you understand the allegory, historical narrative, poetry, genealogy, and the exposition of of law in the First Testament?

The Torah, the Nevi'im and the Ketuvim in the Hebrew Bible as a whole contain a profound historical and prophetic message of the coming of the Messiah. How come Judaism got it so wrong and Jesus had to explain it?

Is St John’s Gospel and the book of Revelations, both mystical declarations of history - yesterday, today and tomorrow?

Is the latter open to clear and unequivocal literal interpretation? If so, how is it there are so many pentecostal, charismatic and evangelical interpretations.

“Certainly the Church Fathers can not be dismissed.”

We agree, though I would be less half hearted and state it more positively! Are they not based on inspiration, reason and faith?

“The problem comes when error is manifest and is then compounded by the substitution of man's reasoning to ammend the clear teaching of scripture.”

Absolutely!The Church Fathers are a sound foudation indeed. Perhaps this criticism should be directed at other assemblies who are seeking to force God’s hand in Israel.

Following my earlier response I have researched your question further.

len is indeed correct in referencing the 4 four letter written word for God first used in Genesis 2:4. In our terms this is YHWH. In Hebrew: יהוה

In Exodus 3:14 God speaks His name to Moses. This is open to a variety of translations - "I SHALL BE WHO I SHALL BE"; "I AM HE WHO IS", "I AM WHO AM" or "I AM WHO I AM". In Hebrew: אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה

I recognise NO human authority in matters spiritual, save that of the eldership of a local assembly of believers (Christian, obviously) of which I happen to be a member of at the time, and even then I will follow them only so far as they follow Christ, as I am ordered to do by the real Bishop of Rome, the Apostle Paul.

Hallelujah, or its Latin equivalent - alleluia - does not, in any sense, mean 'God is great'. That's the Islamic chant, often observed before the be-heading of an old man or the bombing of other innocents.

The God or Allah for Muslims and Arabic speaking Jews and Christians, was and is the God of Abraham, Jacob and Adam, in fact, the God of all the prophets mentioned in the Old Testament. The amendments of men painted The God as cruel, wrathful and full of uncertainties. If you have read the Koran, the consistency is very consistent. The reference of God is consistent and the linage of prophets mentioned and told of their story are consistent too.They were carrying the same message for mankind. Worshiping the One God. And rejecting earthly gods, the created and perishable. Mostly were idols created by the hands of the Creator. A rebellion based on greed and proudness, which I think are also two of Christians' definition of seven deadly sins.

Those who gave themselves to God were considered as weak and stupid, as always. The proud that had reaped success through ages of plunder, lies and deceptions are so boastful that they had associated their triumph with pure hard work and honest knowledge. They are so used to lying. The truth would be lies to them.

We Muslims do not blame The God or the prophets or the good ones for this life and its turbulences on this earth. We only blame Satan, the evil ones and mostly ourselves, for falling into their traps from time to time. When we do, we make amend. We right the wrong and try hardly to achieve the ultimate repentance or taubatan nasuha, which mean a total detachment of any sins or even things that are not but considered as inappropriate to the nature of the beautiful human being. Could we have a dialogue of faith without attacking each other Mr. Eman?

My real world is speeding up its pace, but I'll try to make time for a genuine understanding of the differences between Islam and Christianity. Pauses are to be expected, hopefully not too long that we would forgot about it.

Don't worry Mr. E man, the viking got everything upside down, he doesn't even know whether his axe is really his or not.

Since Muslims believed and knew that there is only The God as The Only God in His Oneness and Completeness, I don't really dare to say we are worshiping different God or not. The God for His mercy, the Most Beneficent and the Most Merciful, even answer the prayer of those who didn't recognise Him and instead worship His creations including his own whims. A great deal of his life would be ignoring God to please all his senses in this limited, devaluing life by heeding no boundries in whatsoever.

In all the verses of the Koran, except one, begins with "In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful." Translations may vary, but it is referring to the same essence of meaning. And we can double check them in the Arabic Koran. The language that it had been revealed with, untampered.

Mr Eman/Chancellor More 3 January 2011 21:18'I have openly declared my FAITH.No, all you have stated is a blinding allegiance to Rome , irrespective of the TRUTH!

I have told you I am an ex catholic and proved it by my Italian heritage, knowledge of RCC (Choir boy/Altar boy), taught at a Jesuit Grammar school for boys, Why I left Rome and became a born again christian ( Do you even KNOW what this term means in Our Lord's description to Nicodemus and WHY Roman Catholics are NOT ?)..Or have you forgotten what we were taught from First Confession?..Catholic first, Christian second.You have stated you are a Roman Catholic, I have stated I am not Roman Catholic anymore nor Protestant within the broad terms as I reject ALL RCC Dogma!I have stated my beliefs 'ad nauseum' to you, WHY are you asking NOW.My Church is MY business and none of your concern! My Faith is not defined by Buildings or Statement of Creeds but ONLY by the Word's Of Jesus and His Word revealed in both the Old and New Testament.. I am of the One Body of Christ ( All people irrespective of Race or Culture) and no one else (True Believers whose Faith is in Christ alone and FULLY SUFFICIENT in ALL Circumstances and Needs as declared by His Word. I am fully provided for by my Saviour!!!

2 Timothy 2:19 19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.)

You are on this blog, using multiple blogs or Anon's to ask questions, get self confirming statements, all from yourself to yourself (the depths that the 'catholic faithful' will stoop to promote and continue in error is truly mindboggling!).. The thought of having to be like this to justify any statements or back them up is abhorrent to me but SPEAKS VOLUMES about YOU.

That I must LIE to justify my God and His Word means that ALL is lost as I state lies as truth so therefore my God must not exist and this is something I could never contemplate!

As stated with my own atheistic catholic father, a condition that could only exist in catholicism, where you are doubly condemned..1 There is no God/There is, so you go to Eternal Lake of Fire for unbelief. 2 There is no need for a personal saving faith in Christ as your life is irrelevant as to how you have lived or what you have believed. The RCC HOLDS the keys to heaven so you will be ushered in by a pope, obviously after many masses, lit candles,good works, prayers to saints or mary are said, money is paid for on your behalf with indulgences by the church to PUSH you up Purgatory Way/Salvation is ONLY by believing on Jesus's sacrifice as 'a once for all act' and salvation is wrought by NO other means or act. You are therefore condemned and go to the Eternal Lake of Fire!!

You state 'clarify by whose human authority each proclaim their interpretation of Holy Scripture as truth?' None of the people you are trying to OUT have declared any such human authority..He is the Holy Spirit PROMISED by Christ to indwell those who 'Believe On Him' and by whose AUTHORITY we interpret and speak as we are COMMANDED to by Scripture.

John 8:31-32“31 If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; 32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free”.

Srizels,Can you note see that the statements you are making are totally contradictory?How can the God of the Christians be the god of the Muslims?The God of the Bible is fulfilling his purposes through Christians and Israel.

I have often wondered what Islam and Catholicism had in common.It has always puzzled me.

Then I saw it.

Many biblical commentators have connected the final antichrist system with a revival of the Roman Empire . It is interesting that the original Roman Empire was divided into eastern and western sections.I believe the Capital was moved by(none other than) Constantine the founder of Catholicism!)from Rome to Constantinople. Today the western half is dominated by Roman Catholicism and the eastern half by Islam. Both are religions which came out of New Testament Christianity, but actually changed the heart of the Gospel message and became persecutors of those who are true to the Gospel. Both are in conflict, but are in their own way contributing to the final antichrist system, which will ultimately destroy both of them.

Response Part 1 Mr Eman/Chancellor More 3 January 2011 21:18'I have openly declared my FAITH.No, all you have stated is a blinding allegiance to Rome , irrespective of the TRUTH!

I have told you I am an ex catholic, Why I left Rome and became a born again christian ( Do you even KNOW what this term means in Our Lord's description to Nicodemus and WHY Roman Catholics are NOT ?)..Or have you forgotten what we were taught from First Confirmation?..Catholic first, Christian second.You have stated you are a Roman Catholic, I have stated I am not Roman Catholic anymore nor Protestant within the broad terms as I reject ALL RCC Dogma!My Faith is not defined by Buildings or Statement of Creeds but ONLY by the Word's Of Jesus and His Word revealed in both the Old and New Testament.. I am of the One Body of Christ ( All people irrespective of Race or Culture) and no one else (True Believers whose Faith is in Christ alone and FULLY SUFFICIENT in ALL Circumstances and Needs as declared by His Word. I am fully provided for by my Saviour!!!

2 Timothy 2:19 19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.)

You are on this blog, using multiple blogs or Anon's to ask questions, get self confirming statements, all from yourself to yourself (the depths that the 'catholic faithful' will stoop to promote and continue in error is truly mindboggling!).. The thought of having to act in this manner to justify any statements or back them up is abhorrent to me..That I must LIE to justify my God and His Word means that ALL is lost as I now must state lies as if truth so therefore my God and Saviour must not exist! This is something I could never contemplate!So Says KINGOFHIGHCS

Response Part 1 Mr Eman/Chancellor More 3 January 2011 21:18'I have openly declared my FAITH.No, all you have stated is a blinding allegiance to Rome , irrespective of the TRUTH!

I have told you I am an ex catholic, you have stated you are a Roman Catholic, I have stated I am not Roman Catholic anymore nor Protestant within the broad terms as I reject ALL RCC Dogma!My Faith is defined ONLY by the Word's Of Jesus and His Word revealed in both the Old and New Testament.. I am of the One Body of Christ ( All people irrespective of Race or Culture) and no one else (True Believers whose Faith is in Christ alone and FULLY SUFFICIENT in ALL Circumstances and Needs as declared by His Word. I am fully provided for by my Saviour!!!

2 Timothy 2:19 19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.)

KINGOFHIGHCS SaidResponse Part 2 Mr Eman/Chancellor More 3 January 2011 21:18As stated with my own atheistic catholic father, a condition that could only exist in catholicism, where you are doubly condemned..1 There is no God/There is, so you go to Eternal Lake of Fire for unbelief. 2 There is no need for a personal saving faith in Christ as your life is irrelevant as to how you have lived or what you have believed. The RCC HOLDS the keys to heaven so you will be ushered in by a pope, obviously after many masses, lit candles,good works, prayers to saints or mary are said, money is paid for on your behalf with indulgences by the church to PUSH you up Purgatory Way/Salvation is ONLY by believing on Jesus's sacrifice as 'a once for all act' and salvation is wrought by NO other means or act. You are therefore condemned and go to the Eternal Lake of Fire!!

You state 'clarify by whose human authority each proclaim their interpretation of Holy Scripture as truth?' None of the people you are trying to OUT have declared any such human authority that I am aware of..He is the Holy Spirit PROMISED by Christ to indwell those who 'Believe On Him' and by whose AUTHORITY we interpret and speak as we are COMMANDED to by Scripture.

John 8:31-32“31 If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; 32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free”John 6:4545 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.1 Cor 2:10-1410 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 2 Pet 1:2121 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Why don't you 'len' and various others, declare yourselves to be 'non-denominational' christians who nevertheless subscribe to 'doctrines' of evanglical millennialism mixed with charismatic pentecostalism?

If I've got this wrong, please accept my apologies but in the absence of clear statements from you it is difficult to understand what you're actually saying.

As you know Catholicism rejects these theories, seeing them as deceptions of the Antichrist.

The many and various competing theories you and your adherents hold and the way they shift and change, about the future God has in mind for mankind are based on texts and portions found here and there in Holy Scripture. Prophetic utterances, especially those in apocalyptic literature, is pregnant with figurative, symbolic pictures and other mystical descriptions.

No wonder your 'church' is so broad!

Given this chasm between us is there really any point in a continuing a 'dialogue'?

One who denounces those who post 'anon' in order to agree with themselves, or who post under different names to give positive comments to themselves, is usually known as a troll.

I could think of other words, such as 'liar', or 'deceiver'. You hi-jack the blog with your 'So-says-big-mouth' bulls**t and then expect others to bow before your lies.

You have been found out. Deleting posts works only so far as the readership. If I was to ask His Grace if he were to know the content of a deleted post, and confirm which of us is the liar, josephgalelli, I trust him to tell the truth.

You've posted under multiple screen-names, slapping your own back, whilst simultaneously condemning others you imagine have done the same thing.

You then dig in your heels, despite knowing that I know that you are a liar.

You'll see that I posted the comment '4th Jan, 00:52', yesterday.

This mirrored the time of a deleted comment, one which severely denounced the use of multiple screen-names and 'anons' to make one's point, (it also made other points, which I am happy to debate) whilst being the very same thing. It was made by 'JOSEPHGALELLI' with the footer 'So says the KINGOFHIGHCS' and then was almost instantly deleted.

It was then re-posted, in edited form, by the same King of Wishful Thinking.

A lovely, wise old man once taught me; you'll have to get up very early in the morning in order to catch me.

Sleep on, wastrel.

PS I would imagine His Grace is resting at this unearthly hour, but when he awakes, I trust, if necessary, he will confirm the truth of my posts. As I have said before, 'If not, all is lost'.

I have only ever had 1 blog until it was attacked (I then had to delete it because it showed my name not my blog name) and had to create another to respond today.Ask Cranmer if you like, this is the truth. I don't lie.

My name is known because of attacks on my blog by people who communicate here who will allow no opinion but their own (therefore against my wishes), so why should their's remain anonymous after illegally attacking my blog account!

His Grace has already responded to your private email, and informed you that he hasn't the foggiest notion what you're talking about. If you have a blog security issue, strengthen your security. And please opine about any unjust incursions in your own space.

Len, The God is The Only God that governed everything and everywhere, within our limited knowledge and beyond. We are limited. The God was and is not. He even created the time.

This is what I mean by when I said The God was and is the only God. Other than Him is the created ones. Those who depended and depends on Him, always, in the time of need.

And Jesus said in John 20:17

King James Bible"Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and [to] my God, and your God".

How plain English can get other than this, Len?

Answer me without twisting this fact and use other verses, unsure of its authenticity, of anonymous writers that referred to Jesus' companions to gain weight. Again one has to wonder on whose authority and approval? Of Jesus? Or pagans poisoning the truth from the inside. The stories of the revelation to Paul were also numerous. Which is the actual correct one? Who knows?

And for this you have to answer openly to us all. Do you believe this verse as true, Len?

It is actually a clear enough question - and one srizels asks repeatedly.

He wants to understand how Jesus, the man, can also be the Son of God, the Christ, and fully God.

Islam whilst worshipping the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, does not understand the Hypostatic Union or the Trinitarian nature of God. Neither are clearly stated in scripture but were developed over time by the Catholic Church.

I do think it is important to know how many people claim to be from particular religions. In the UK in particular the christian lobby frequently use the "Christian country" concept to justify historic privileges. Such as Bishops in the House of Lords. But measures of christian church attendance suggest the faith is very much a falling minority.My one issue with the question is that it does not uncover the difference between a religious belief and a religious identity. Which are frequently very different things. Again in the UK specifically, many people identify with a christian identify but, when pressed, do not believe any of the core christian theologies - original sin etc...

In Luke 1:30-35 the angel Gabriel appeared before the virgin Mary and said,"...Do not be afraid, Mary; for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb, and bear a son, and you shall name Him Jesus. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David; and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever; and His kingdom will have no end." And Mary said to the angel, "How can this be, since I am a virgin?" And the angel answered and said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy offspring shall be called the Son of God."

Jesus had to be born this way so as to not inherit a sin nature, because with a sin nature he would have been powerless to save anyone!.

Christ possessed two identities, two capacities. Jesus was both God and man. He could act in his capacity as God. He could act in the capacity of man. He could speak as God and he could speak as man. As a man he said, "I thirst." As God he could say to the blind man or to the leper, "I will, be thou clean, " without any reference to being deity. In him were two genders, divine and human. Gender, as used here, does not refer to sexual differences but to differences of class or category of being. He occupied two classes, the only one who ever did. He was God and man, God manifest in flesh (1 Timothy 3:16).

Original sin is an Augustinian construct and thus primarily a catholic doctrine. Many protsestants do not accept it. The Reformation did not address all of the questionable theological positions extant in the reformed denominations.

"The Blessed Virgin Mary is the one woman in the entire Bible who makes the claim, “All generations to come shall call me blessed” (Luke 1:48). And why is that? Well, Catholics believe it is because she was preserved from all time from sin by a special privilege of God. God got to create His own mother on earth".

http://www.catholicbible101.com/theblessedvirginmary.htm

And we come to the conclusion to ask, who exist first? god or his mother? Maybe you'll say that you as a non-worldly church creed are not included in this entanglement. But it would be a weak excuse. Very weak. I want to ask who created who, but I'll save it for later.

Mr. Kingofhighcs has been slain by the English Viking. What a poor demise for a king. How sad.

Then what theology are you holding as your own, Len? Are there any references that I can read and discover in order to understand the churchless Christians? How does your Bible differ from the Catholics? Are you even a Protestant? Do you have the same trinity concept as the Catholics?

About His Grace:

Archbishop Cranmer takes as his inspiration the words of Sir Humphrey Appleby: ‘It’s interesting,’ he observes, ‘that nowadays politicians want to talk about moral issues, and bishops want to talk politics.’ It is the fusion of the two in public life, and the necessity for a wider understanding of their complex symbiosis, which leads His Grace to write on these very sensitive issues.

Cranmer's Law:

"It hath been found by experience that no matter how decent, intelligent or thoughtful the reasoning of a conservative may be, as an argument with a liberal is advanced, the probability of being accused of ‘bigotry’, ‘hatred’ or ‘intolerance’ approaches 1 (100%).”

Follow His Grace on

The cost of His Grace's conviction:

His Grace's bottom line:

Freedom of speech must be tolerated, and everyone living in the United Kingdom must accept that they may be insulted about their own beliefs, or indeed be offended, and that is something which they must simply endure, not least because some suffer fates far worse. Comments on articles are therefore unmoderated, but do not necessarily reflect the views of Cranmer. Comments that are off-topic, gratuitously offensive, libelous, or otherwise irritating, may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on any thread does not constitute their endorsement by Cranmer; it may simply be that he considers them to be intelligent and erudite contributions to religio-political discourse...or not.

The Anglican Communion has no peculiar thought, practice, creed or confession of its own. It has only the Catholic Faith of the ancient Catholic Church, as preserved in the Catholic Creeds and maintained in the Catholic and Apostolic constitution of Christ's Church from the beginning.Dr Geoffrey Fisher, Archbishop of Canterbury, 1945-1961

British Conservatism's greatest:

The epithet of 'great' can be applied only to those who were defining leaders who successfully articulated and embodied the Conservatism of their age. They combined in their personal styles, priorities and policies, as Edmund Burke would say, 'a disposition to preserve' with an 'ability to improve'.

I am in politics because of the conflict between good and evil, and I believe that in the end good will triumph.Margaret Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher LG, OM, PC, FRS.(Prime Minister 1979-1990)

We have not overthrown the divine right of kings to fall down for the divine right of experts.Harold Macmillan, 1st Earl of Stockton, OM, PC.(Prime Minister 1957-1963)

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.Sir Winston Churchill, KG, OM, CH, TD, FRS, PC (Can).(Prime Minister 1940-1945, 1951-1955)

I am not struck so much by the diversity of testimony as by the many-sidedness of truth.Stanley Baldwin, 1st Earl Baldwin of Bewdley, KG, PC.(Prime Minister 1923-1924, 1924-1929, 1935-1937)

If you believe the doctors, nothing is wholesome; if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent; if you believe the military, nothing is safe.Robert Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury, KG, GCVO, PC.(Prime Minister 1885-1886, 1886-1892, 1895-1902)

I am a Conservative to preserve all that is good in our constitution, a Radical to remove all that is bad. I seek to preserve property and to respect order, and I equally decry the appeal to the passions of the many or the prejudices of the few.Benjamin Disraeli KG, PC, FRS, Earl of Beaconsfield.(Prime Minister 1868, 1874-1880)

Public opinion is a compound of folly, weakness, prejudice, wrong feeling, right feeling, obstinacy, and newspaper paragraphs.Sir Robert Peel, Bt.(Prime Minister 1834-1835, 1841-1846)

I consider the right of election as a public trust, granted not for the benefit of the individual, but for the public good.Robert Jenkinson, 2nd Earl of Liverpool.(Prime Minister 1812-1827)

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.The Rt Hon. William Pitt, the Younger.(Prime Minister 1783-1801, 1804-1806)